so...

[Ohioprof]

I haven't asked anyone to believe as I do. But as a Christian, we should believe what God says.

As such, those who do not believe in adherence with the Christ honoring creed of Nicea that aligns with God's word can take their stumbling blocks to a forum that does not have CHRISTIAN on it.

This is a CHRISTIAN forum for the advancement of God's Kingdom. It is not the personal domain of those who rant against the Word of God in effort to make their unBiblical doctrine "the new right."






1 And God spoke all these words:
2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

3 "You shall have no other gods before [a] me.Ex. 20:1-3

Yours may be partial and flawed. I'm indwelled by the Holy Spirit. I have the mind of Christ with His understanding.

Sounds like just another excuse for justifying relativism and the fashioning of every person's individual version of the truth as a god.




Nope. impossible for them to continue because they run contrary to thetruth of God's Word and espouse that which is antiChristian.



They have everything to do with antiChrist doctrine so keep on with the wishful thinking of it nt affecting folks ability to say that they are Christians and then post some mess that runs contrary to God's Word.

Light has nothing in common with darkness.

I have seen no one advocating "anti-Christ doctrines" in the Debates on Homosexuality subforums. And the new rule does not impose conformity in interpreting the Bible, or even insist that people rely on the Bible. You equate your interpretation of the Bible with what "God says," but it's not what God says. It's what you think God says. All anyone has is what they think God says, or what they think is true. No one here speaks for God or has the "truth."

 

[Ohioprof]

You hope it does not. But let me tell you something, this subforum was not in fact created as an outlet but as a deterrant. You see, when this place was nicene, the fringies were raiding all the forums with homosexual topics and in fact derailing threads left and right so that this forum was created and the topic of homosexuality was in fact limited to here. You were not even allowed to state in your html or signature that you were a homosexual.

In fact, when this place was nicene before, a site wide poll was conducted and the vast vast majority of members polled agreed that homosexuality was an abomination to God. While you state that DOH has nothing to do with nicene I beg to differ. They kicked homosexual topics into this littlle sub forum. I would not be surprised if this forum was closed and I also would not be surprised if within days or weeks non-nicenes were kicked out of membership forums. the new owner is very conservative and I guarantee you that as a Baptist he is not accepting of the gay lifestyle.

I have no idea what the beliefs of the site owner are beyond what he says they are. And being gay is not a "lifestyle," as gay people have told you over and over, though you refuse to listen to what we say about our own lives.

It seems that you want to use majority rule to silence those who don't agree with you. If the site owner wants to do that, it's up to him. It won't benefit you or anyone else, frankly, to have those with whom you disagree silenced. Closing your ears to other people doesn't mean their ideas disappear or that they disappear. And closing your ears to other people means that you and others don't get to have your beliefs challenged, which is a disservice to you and to everyone.

We all need to hear the ideas of those with whom we disagree. Otherwise we become smug in our beliefs, certain that we know the "truth" and that those who disagree with us are wrong, or are "sinning" because they disagree. If we don't have our beliefs challenged regularly, we run the risk of believing that our ideas and beliefs are those of God, which is a dangerous thing to imagine. It produces intolerance, rigidity, a refusal to compromise, a refusal to accept people who are different. And taken to the extreme, those kinds of attitudes lead to persecution of unpopular minorities and even war or genocide. We protect our society and each other from that by engaging in dialogue and debate with people who are different from ourselves, who think differently, and whose beliefs are different from our own. And in doing that, we see those who are different as fellow human beings, as people who should be treated with dignity and compassion. I am not referring just to gay people here. I mean all other people. When we allow ourselves to hear the voices of those with whom we disagree, and when we engage in dialogue with people with whom we disagree, then we all see each other as fellow humans, each of us flawed and incomplete in our understanding. That's how we prevent each other from killing one another or persecuting one another or oppressing one another.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof,

I have seen no one advocating "anti-Christ doctrines" in the Debates on Homosexuality subforums.

You have, any doctrines that are opposite to the gospel once delivered are no gospel at all (Galatians 1) but you denied that Jesus Christ is the Son of God which I have pointed out to you the Bible says is anti-Christ (1 John )

And the new rule does not impose conformity in interpreting the Bible,

Nothing to do with interpreting.

It's what you think God says. All anyone has is what they think God says, or what they think is true. No one here speaks for God or has the "truth."

f course they do if the Bible is true. When Jesus is recorded as saying He speaks the words of the Father God that is either true or untrue and if He did day that and He is speaking the words of God we are quoting God’s word when we repeat it. Your approach merely shows you don’t believe it.

 

[Ohioprof]

I will witness to my fellow passengers during the flight, the ones flying in first class anyway.

I'm glad I never fly first class.

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Ohioprof,
You have, any doctrines that are opposite to the gospel once delivered are no gospel at all (Galatians 1) but you denied that Jesus Christ is the Son of God which I have pointed out to you the Bible says is anti-Christ (1 John )
Nothing to do with interpreting.
f course they do if the Bible is true. When Jesus is recorded as saying He speaks the words of the Father God that is either true or untrue and if He did day that and He is speaking the words of God we are quoting God’s word when we repeat it. Your approach merely shows you don’t believe it.

All reading is interpreting. I have explained that before. Your reading the Bible is interpreting it, just as everyone else reading the Bible is interpreting it. That's part of the act of reading: interpretation.

This subforum is not for questioning the Christianity of other posters, and to do so is a violation of the DOH subforum rules. So please do not go there.

 

[Ohioprof]

It is a CHRISTIAN FORUM.
CHRISTIAN.

And Christians need to remember that they are called to be pleasing to Christ FIRST. And when a CHRISTIAN forum has taken to espousing all sorts of heresies and blasphemies and still allowing folks to call themselves Christians, Christ is not glorified.

Too many times we become so concerned with being tolerant of everyone and his views that we forget that we are to be a witness for Christ FIRST.

And that IS NOT the witness that is displayed when people ae espousing anti-Christ, anti-Biblical doctrine.

If this board is not witnessing for Christ, it's witnessing for the enemy. And that should not be allowed.

I am excited that steps have been takenand cntinue to be taken to make the CHRISTIAN FORUMS into a witness for CHRIST.

Now as for the way folks will be treated, they won't be treated with any less love than before. they simply will not be able to promote those things which go against God's Word.

If folks want to talk about homosexuality that's fine. But it is possible to talk about homosexuality and the committing of homosexual acts without purposely trying to endorse as not sinful that which God says is sin.

we don't do it for abortion. we don't do it for adultery. we don't do it for heterosexual fornication. And we don't need to tolerate it of homosexual fornication.

Gods word makes men free. Use it to help people to Christ so that He may give His discernment. Theres no need to argue with people over the TRUTH. This simply gives credence to their anti-Biblical point of view

Different Christians have different understandings of our faith. Your idea of what is a heresy is not the same as that of all other Christians. This diversity of viewpoints is a strength of Christianity, in my view, not a weakness. Being a Christian should never mean adhering to a rigid conformity of beliefs. It should never mean one group of Christians overrunning all others with their particular doctrine. We grow closer to God by considering a wide range of viewpoints, not by shutting off other views or labeling people with views that differ from ours as heretics or blasphemers or the "anti-Christ" or "deceivers." They/we are not. We are all just people, in this subforum Christians, with different viewpoints and ways of understanding our faith.

 

[Ohioprof]

We have so many denominations because of lies and false doctrine.

I disagree. We have so many denominations because different Christians interpret and practice their faith differently. And that is a good thing, in my view, so long as we listen to each other and dialogue with each other and respect each other and don't affix nasty labels to each other.

There is no correct doctrine. There are only different understandings of faith, and different ways of practicing our faith. And we grow from listening to and respecting each other despite our differences. Some churches welcome gay people as we are. Some do not. Each of those churches has the right to set its own policies; that's religious freedom. Those different churches need to come together, I think, to work on social issues that really matter, like preventing war and ending poverty and protecting the environment. We need to get beyond our differences to work together on common concerns. But different Christians will always understanding and practice our faith differently, at least to some degree.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof,

All reading is interpreting. I have explained that before.

The issue is if the text says “ the cat sat on the mat” you think interpreting it “ the dog stood on the ceiling” or “what might have been a cat might have sat on something that looks like a mat”
Nope, whilst your point has some merit what you do which you call interpretation is disbelief.

This subforum is not for questioning the Christianity of other posters, and to do so is a violation of the DOH subforum rules. So please do not go there.

Neither is the forum for claiming one is a Christian to try and justify a non-Christian view, something you continually and frequently do not least in your next post response to Zaac.

Different Christians have different understandings of our faith.

Your faith isn’t in the same Jesus Christ as ours so who you refer to as Christians probably don’t have Christian understandings.
Your ideas of what makes a Christian or what Christians should do are mostly your ideas, non-Biblical, and not what Christians think or should do.

 

[Floatingaxe]

I have seen no one advocating "anti-Christ doctrines" in the Debates on Homosexuality subforums. And the new rule does not impose conformity in interpreting the Bible, or even insist that people rely on the Bible. You equate your interpretation of the Bible with what "God says," but it's not what God says. It's what you think God says. All anyone has is what they think God says, or what they think is true. No one here speaks for God or has the "truth."

That is untrue. There is truth and it can be known... God imparts it in his word, and He not only delivers that truth, but He interprets it and teaches it to His children so that we can all be united in knowing the same truth. Glory to God!

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I have seen no one advocating "anti-Christ doctrines" in the Debates on Homosexuality subforums. And the new rule does not impose conformity in interpreting the Bible, or even insist that people rely on the Bible.

anti-Christ doctrine is any doctrine that in any way opposes sound Christian doctrine. One for example, is the statement that Jesus was not resurrected, that is anti-Christ doctrine.

You equate your interpretation of the Bible with what "God says," but it's not what God says. It's what you think God says. All anyone has is what they think God says, or what they think is true. No one here speaks for God or has the "truth."

Those that have the Spirit can. How do we tell if they are? We reference it to the bible. If you have disbelief on whether or not scripture is God-inspired then that is one of the core issues. Most (especially fundamentalist) Christians believe the bible is the inspired word of God. If one does not, then the God we follow is different, since our perception of God is very much based within the bible.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

I disagree. We have so many denominations because different Christians interpret and practice their faith differently. And that is a good thing, in my view, so long as we listen to each other and dialogue with each other and respect each other and don't affix nasty labels to each other.

If someone claims to be Christian yet denies every aspect of what you believe is Christ, then what good could they bring to your view? What would you have for them in regards to discourse other than a few words of doctrinal choices?

There is no correct doctrine. There are only different understandings of faith, and different ways of practicing our faith. And we grow from listening to and respecting each other despite our differences. Some churches welcome gay people as we are. Some do not. Each of those churches has the right to set its own policies; that's religious freedom. Those different churches need to come together, I think, to work on social issues that really matter, like preventing war and ending poverty and protecting the environment. We need to get beyond our differences to work together on common concerns. But different Christians will always understanding and practice our faith differently, at least to some degree.

There is correct doctrine. It is found in the bible. try 2 timothy for apostasy and sound doctrine. I agree we need to come together as a community to deal with community wide issues. However, that does not mean we have to merge doctrines together into a big melting pot of belief. I'm not a polytheist, and don't care to be.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof,

We have so many denominations because different Christians interpret and practice their faith differently

Ok name some denominations which deny Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Ohioprof,
The issue is if the text says “ the cat sat on the mat” you think interpreting it “ the dog stood on the ceiling” or “what might have been a cat might have sat on something that looks like a mat”
Nope, whilst your point has some merit what you do which you call interpretation is disbelief.

Neither is the forum for claiming one is a Christian to try and justify a non-Christian view, something you continually and frequently do not least in your next post response to Zaac.

Your faith isn’t in the same Jesus Christ as ours so who you refer to as Christians probably don’t have Christian understandings.
Your ideas of what makes a Christian or what Christians should do are mostly your ideas, non-Biblical, and not what Christians think or should do.

I am making a Christian argument for accepting same-sex marriage. The fact that my understanding of how to be a Christian is different from yours underscores my point that different Christians interpret and practice our faith differently.

There are beliefs we share in common, of course. But we do not all share a rigid adherence to any specific doctrine, and Christians who do embrace a particular doctrine often interpret the doctrine differently. That's why we have so many different Christian denominations.

I think that what Christians share in common is that we follow Jesus. Beyond that, our specific interpretations of our faith differ. And different Christians regard gay people and same-sex marriages differently. Some Christian churches bless same-sex marriages or unions and accept gay people as we are. Others do not. Both kinds of churches are Christian, but they have different understandings of the message of Jesus when it comes to accepting or not accepting gay people.

It has struck me from posting in these threads for the past six months that in addition to the division among Christians over homosexuality, there is a division among Christians over the subject of religious pluralism. By that I mean that some Christians here argue that there is one truth, that we can know this truth with certainty through reading the Bible, that there is one correct way to understand the Bible and all other ways are false, and there is one correct way to be a Christian and to be saved. All other beliefs or ways to interpret the Bible are simply false, according to this view. The other perspective, which I embrace, holds that human knowledge is always partial, that we can never know the whole of truth so long as we are living in the world as humans, that each person interprets the Bible differently and practices his or her faith differently, that each of these different ways of understanding and practicing faith are valid and help us to grow closer to God, that other faiths besides Christianity are also paths to God, and that there is no one correct way to be a Christian or to be a person of faith.

The first perspective argues that there is one way that is the right way to be a Christian and to know God. It is the singular perspective. The second perspective argues that there are many paths to God and many ways to know God and to be a Christian. This is the pluralist perspective.

We seem to debate these two perspectives in here as much as we debate homosexuality. It's been interesting.

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Ohioprof,
Ok name some denominations which deny Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Whether Jesus is the son of God is not an issue that divides Christians usually. The issues that have divided Christians have mostly revolved around how to understand and interpret the Bible, what the message of Jesus tells us about sin and what constitutes sin, and how people are saved. The latter issue was more heated in the 19th century than it is today, but the question of how one is saved was at the center of the rise of diffferent Christian denominations.

 

[Ohioprof]

If someone claims to be Christian yet denies every aspect of what you believe is Christ, then what good could they bring to your view? What would you have for them in regards to discourse other than a few words of doctrinal choices?


There is correct doctrine. It is found in the bible. try 2 timothy for apostasy and sound doctrine. I agree we need to come together as a community to deal with community wide issues. However, that does not mean we have to merge doctrines together into a big melting pot of belief. I'm not a polytheist, and don't care to be.

This is where you and I disagree, over whether there is "correct doctrine." See my post on religious pluralism, in which I elaborate on my thoughts on this difference. I think there are simply different doctrines, none of which is correct. I take no issue with the Nicene Creed as a doctrine; I simply regard it as one of various doctrines that different Christians have embraced.

I agree with your point that we should not seek to meld doctrines together as we come together to work on common issues. We can each profess our different doctrines and approaches but work together where our goals are in common. For example, and I run the risk here of veering way off topic, our church has taken a formal stance against the death penalty. We agreed unanimously as a congregation that we oppose the death penalty. We work with a variety of faith groups, both Christian and non-Christian, to end the death penalty in our state. We do not agree with any of these other faith groups about theological doctrine, as we are a non-doctrinal church. However, we work with them on the issue on which we do agree, which is ending the death penalty. I apologize for the off-topic example, but it illustrates what I think we are both talking about.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof,

I am making a Christian argument for accepting same-sex marriage.

And I am saying it isnt a Christian argument, the Christian argument is that marriage is man and woman and that same-sex unions are error. The evidence is God’s creation purpose for man and woman to be in union (ie. Genesis 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5 etc) and same-sex practice as error (ie. Gen 19 Lev 18 & 20, 1 Cor 6, 1 Tim1, Romans 1 etc)
Now if you want to try and claim same-sex union is a Christian viewpoint them you need first to show where such a concept is countenanced and then explain why the contradiction with the texts that exclude it and condemn it.
I am not interested in your understanding of what you think you are, as has been demonstrated between us your faith isn’t in the same Jesus Christ as mine according to the Biblical record so who you refer to as Christians probably don’t have Christian understandings. Your ideas of what makes a Christian or what Christians should do are mostly your ideas, non-Biblical, and not what Christians think or should do
I am interested in the evidence for what you believe, at the moment your ideas seem merely based on your disbelief.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

Whether Jesus is the son of God is not an issue that divides Christians usually.

because everyone is clear on that point.

 

[Ohioprof]

anti-Christ doctrine is any doctrine that in any way opposes sound Christian doctrine. One for example, is the statement that Jesus was not resurrected, that is anti-Christ doctrine.


Those that have the Spirit can. How do we tell if they are? We reference it to the bible. If you have disbelief on whether or not scripture is God-inspired then that is one of the core issues. Most (especially fundamentalist) Christians believe the bible is the inspired word of God. If one does not, then the God we follow is different, since our perception of God is very much based within the bible.

I do not think that differences over how we regard scripture mean that we worship a different God. We just understand God, and how to know God, differently. It's not that our Gods are different, for there is only one God. It's that we are different from each other in how we think and what we believe. But beyond our differences, we are all people and we are all beloved by God.

 

[Ohioprof]

because everyone is clear on that point.

For the most part, Christians today agree on this point. It's not a major source of division within the faith right now, though it was in early Christianity. There are other big issues over which Christians are divided today, and I have named what I think they are.

 

[Jet_A_Jockey]

This is where you and I disagree, over whether there is "correct doctrine." See my post on religious pluralism, in which I elaborate on my thoughts on this difference. I think there are simply different doctrines, none of which is correct. I take no issue with the Nicene Creed as a doctrine; I simply regard it as one of various doctrines that different Christians have embraced.

Sure, the nicene creed is nothing but a creed. It has no influence over what I believe, it just so happens to encompass what I already believe. I believed in Christ before I even knew what the nicene creed was, I just think it is a set of beliefs that best define what a Christian is.

I agree with your point that we should not seek to meld doctrines together as we come together to work on common issues. We can each profess our different doctrines and approaches but work together where our goals are in common. For example, and I run the risk here of veering way off topic, our church has taken a formal stance against the death penalty. We agreed unanimously as a congregation that we oppose the death penalty. We work with a variety of faith groups, both Christian and non-Christian, to end the death penalty in our state. We do not agree with any of these other faith groups about theological doctrine, as we are a non-doctrinal church. However, we work with them on the issue on which we do agree, which is ending the death penalty. I apologize for the off-topic example, but it illustrates what I think we are both talking about.

Thats good that you as a community can change things for the better. I'll veer ot and say that I actually am either way with the death penalty. The brutality of some acts that people commit have not changed throughout the ages, and so their punishment should not either. But back to the topic